Abstract

This article begins with a general and abstract definition of logic and, particularly, of paraconsistent logics, to establish a common ground for the discussion. Briefly stating, these kinds of logics have the property of being non-explosive, that is, it is not possible to infer any conclusion from contradictory premises. Using these definitions, it is possible to analyze some of the philosophical aspects of paraconsistent logics, in particular, the relation between the notion of explosion and the law of non-contradiction, as well as the syntactic/semantic possibility and, above all, the metaphysical possibility of paraconsistent logics. I further analyze a stronger position towards paraconsistency, namely: the claim that there are true contradictions. This articles concludes with some possible critiques to paraconsistent logics – and their refutations as well –, and pose some open questions for further work.